BRITISH BAN ON EXPENSIVE DRUG OVERTURNED

Health regulators have overturned a ban on two drugs that could benefit patients suffering from rare and life-threatening brain cancers. The revised guidance from the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) means that up to 800 patients a year will benefit from receiving the drugs, Temodal and Gliadel, on the NHS. Doctors and campaigners have been battling for two years to get NICE to reverse its decision to bar brain specialists from prescribing the drugs. The original guidance in 2005 rejected both therapies on the basis of cost effectiveness.

Temodal was originally approved for newly diagnosed cases of brain cancer in 2001 but NICE refused to approve its use for advanced cases of the disease despite compelling evidence from trials. The decision led to anger as the drug, a tablet that patients take as oral chemotherapy, was invented by British scientists funded by Cancer Research UK, yet neurologists in this country were unable to prescribe it to patients.

Gliadel is administered in a wafer that is left at the site where a brain tumour has been removed by surgery. Trials show that the drug is highly effective at mopping up remaining cancer cells and preventing the disease recurring.

Yesterday cancer charities called on health authorities to make the drugs available immediately and not wait until the decision comes into force in June. Ella Pybus, speaking on behalf of a consortium of charities, said: "Everyone is relieved that NICE has had this change of heart. There was solid evidence that these drugs work. "Now we are looking for primary care trusts to give these drugs to all those who qualify for treatment. It will be a cruel blow if treatments for one of the most lethal of all cancers were further delayed because of lack of sufficient funding."

Source





Shocking government medicine in Tasmania

Must not get sick after hours!

A man with agonising pancreatitis said he was frightened while he waited seven hours overnight in the Royal Hobart Hospital before getting medical attention. Shane Lockley was taken by ambulance to the emergency department and put in a wheelchair with a morphine drip in his arm. Mr Lockley said it was only after he started spitting up blood that he was taken into an emergency cubicle and then only after waiting about another hour. The incident happened on a Sunday night late last month.

"My GP told me if you get symptoms to get to hospital, because this disease is potentially fatal," said Mr Lockley, of Sorell. "I had to beg the ambulance to pick me up, then at hospital they put me in front of a television in a wheelchair. "Not one person checked me. Even if something had happened to me, they wouldn't have known. "I was spitting up blood and went up to the nurse to tell them. The drip ran out and the blood was in the tube. What's going on? "I was badly treated. A doctor walked in and (said:) 'How's your friend, Mr Alcohol,' assuming I was a drinker, but I said: `I don't drink, mate.'"

Mr Lockley, 42, said he had blood tests and was sent home. He said a report was not sent to his GP and they did not check his records. He said he needed to have his gall bladder removed and attacks of pain were becoming more frequent.

Wife Terisa said the ordeal scared the family. "We were just appalled. The doctor gave pretty strict instructions he would have to go to hospital if necessary, because it can be fatal," Mrs Lockley said. RHH chief executive officer Craig White said the care provided to Mr Lockley was appropriate for his clinical circumstances. Dr White said a report was faxed to his GP on the morning he was discharged. Mr Lockley said the doctor did not have the information when he saw him later

Source

***************************

For greatest efficiency, lowest cost and maximum choice, ALL hospitals and health insurance schemes should be privately owned and run -- with government-paid vouchers for the very poor and minimal regulation. Both Australia and Sweden have large private sector health systems with government reimbursement for privately-provided services so can a purely private system with some level of government reimbursement or insurance for the poor be so hard to do?

For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, GUN WATCH, EDUCATION WATCH, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS, DISSECTING LEFTISM, IMMIGRATION WATCH and EYE ON BRITAIN. My Home Pages are here or here or here. Email me (John Ray) here. For times when blogger.com is playing up, there are mirrors of this site here and here.

***************************